Back

Intraspecific density changes the impact of interspecific competitors on parasite infection traits in multiple infections

Godinho, D.; Rodrigues, L.; Lefevre, S.; Magalhaes, S.; Duncan, A. B.

2023-12-20 evolutionary biology
10.1101/2023.12.19.572385 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Co-infections are frequent, with consequences for parasite life-history traits expressed at within- and between-host levels. However, little is known about whether the effect of interspecific competitors on traits are correlated or independent or if they change with intraspecific competition. To address this, we investigated the occurrence of genetic correlations among within- and betweenhost traits at different intra-specific densities of inbred lines of the spider mite, Tetranychus urticae with its competitor T. evansi. First, we found T. evansi presence on a shared host leaf produced a negative (non-genetic) correlation between virulence (leaf damage) and number of daughters (transmitting stages) at intermediate intraspecific densities; this same relationship was not significant without competitors. Second, we show interspecific competitors increases transmission to adjacent leaf discs, measured as movement of adult T. urticae females, but only at low and intermediate intraspecific densities. Finally we tested whether within-host traits (virulence and transmitting stages) were correlated with between-host traits (movement to adjacent patches), with or without competitors, at different conspecific densities. We found traits were mostly independent; interspecific competitors may increase transmission across hosts without affecting virulence (or vice versa). These independent effects on within- and between-host traits indicate competition may impact epidemiology and parasite trait evolution.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.